Update: Gender differences in CABG outcomes—Have we bridged the gap?

32Citations
Citations of this article
41Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background Appreciation of unique presentation, patterns and underlying pathophysiology of coronary artery disease in women has driven gender based risk stratification and risk reduction efforts over the last decade. Data regarding whether these advances have resulted in unequivocal improvements in outcomes of CABG in women is conflicting. The objective of our study was to assess gender differences in post-operative outcomes following CABG. Methods Retrospective analyses of institutional data housed in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) database for patients undergoing CABG between 2002 and 2020 were conducted. Multivariable regression analysis was conducted to investigate gender differences in postoperative outcomes. P-values were adjusted using Bonferroni correction to reduce type-I errors. Results Our final cohort of 6,250 patients had fewer women than men (1,339 vs. 4,911). more women were diabetic (52.0% vs. 41.2%, p<0.001) and hypertensive (89.1% vs. 84.0%, p<0.001). Women had higher adjusted odds of developing ventilator dependence >48 hours (OR: 1.65 [1.21, 2.45], p = 0.002) and cardiac readmissions (OR: 1.56 [1.27, 2.30], p = 0.003). After adjustment for comorbidity burden, mortality rates in women were comparable to those of age-matched men. Conclusion The findings of our study indicate that despite apparent reduction of differences in mortality, the burden of postoperative morbidity is still high among women.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Matyal, R., Qureshi, N. Q., Mufarrih, S. H., Sharkey, A., Bose, R., Chu, L. M., … Khabbaz, K. R. (2021). Update: Gender differences in CABG outcomes—Have we bridged the gap? PLoS ONE, 16(9 September). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0255170

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free